A wide variety of male condoms or prophylactic devices are known for use in disease prevention and to safeguard against pregnancy. In the past such devices have been tight fitting to prevent accidental dislodgment during coitus. Furthermore, in order to be rupture proof the wall thickness of membrane material forming the pouch of such male condoms has resulted in loss of sensation by the male user during coitus. Also, tight fitting condoms bind the glans penis resulting in restricted sensitivity and loss of stimulation during coitus.
Other loose fitting condoms have been proposed for female use including U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,004,591 and 3,536,066. Both of these patents disclose pouches of a diameter much larger than that of the glans penis and they do not include pouch on pouch means capable of producing stimulation of the surface of a glans penis during coitus. Also, in the above patents, the condoms cover the vaginal wall rather than the penis.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,816,542 discloses a condom with a thickened wall portion at the condom tip for stimulation.
U.S. Pat. No. 254,808 issued Apr. 22, 1980 discloses an ornamental design in which the pouch of a male condom has outwardly directed bulges. However, the bulges are not arranged so as to stimulate the surface of a glans penis during coitus.
Another approach has been to provide male condoms with ultra-thin walls, e.g., wall thickness of 0.03 mm. Such condoms have been manufactured and sold in Japan in recognition of the increase in sensitivity to the male user. Such ultra thin condoms, however, are more susceptible to leakage or tearing, which makes them less suitable when considering protection against life threatening diseases such as Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). Furthermore, even the ultra thin condoms fit tightly and bind the glans penis, resulting in restricted sensitivity and loss of stimulation during coitus.
None of the aforesaid condoms include a condom with a pouch or pouches on a tubular pouch arranged to produce a rubbing action on the most sensitive region of the glans penis. Furthermore, none of the aforesaid condoms provide a condom which has a wall thickness on the order of up to four times the thickness of the ultra-thin variety of condoms while retaining equivalent sensitivity or greater sensitivity.